The country’s consumer dispute redressal system is operating with serious gaps in leadership, staffing, and data transparency despite rising caseloads, according to a new nationwide assessment by the India Justice Report (IJR).
“More than half of the president and member positions in India’s State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions (SCDRCs) remained vacant in 2025, contributing to a 21% rise in overall case pendency over five years,” the report said, adding that amongst the large and mid-sized states, only Bihar and Haryana filled both member and president posts.
Leadership Gaps
In 2025, 17 of the 35 state commissions were without a president, and 40% of the sanctioned member positions remained vacant. Furthermore, while regulations stipulate that every district must have a commission, one in ten districts is currently without one, indicating a concerning gap in governance.
“These presidents play a vital role in forming benches, supervising district operations, and managing finances. Compounding the issue, nearly 40% of authorised member positions at both state and district levels remain unfilled, while state commissions report an average staff vacancy rate of around 20%,” the report said.
The report covered budgets, infrastructure, human resources, workload and gender diversity at state and district levels, and draws on case data for 28.57 lakh matters filed between 2010 and 2024 on the government’s e‑Jagriti dashboard.
The report, utilising data from Right to Information (RTI) requests and parliamentary responses, has positioned Andhra Pradesh at the forefront among 19 large and mid-sized states in terms of institutional capacity. Meanwhile, in the category of small states, Meghalaya and Sikkim ranked highest.
As of 2025, a significant portion of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions (SCDRCs) and district consumer commissions are facing critical leadership shortages. Currently, half of all SCDRCs lack a sitting president, with one-third of district commissions in a similar situation.
Rising Tide of Pendency
The report also mentioned that approximately 35% of pending cases at state commissions have remained unresolved for over three years, which far exceeds the expected resolution timeframe of three to five months. Over the past five years, overall case pendency has surged by about 20%, raising alarms about the efficiency and effectiveness of consumer redressal mechanisms in the state.
Justice (Retd.) Sanjay Kishan Kaul, former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, noted that these gaps render legislation non-functional.
“Significant gaps affect the consumer protection institutional structure and the access to speedy and effective redressal,” Kaul stated during the report’s release. He warned that such deficits “erode the confidence of consumers”.
Similarly, Justice (Retd.) Madan B. Lokur described the situation as “terribly grim,” stating the system is working at a “subsistence level”.
He questioned whether these bodies can still be considered effective grievance redressal mechanisms when consumption and economic growth are “severely affected by the lack of faith” in the system. The report concludes that durable economic growth requires redressal mechanisms to keep pace with market prosperity.
The report added that workload pressures in the commission sector have also risen, with the number of pending cases rising significantly from 427,000 in 2019 to over 515,000 by the end of 2024.
Despite legislation mandating case resolutions within a period of three to five months, a striking 35% of cases in the 19 responding state commissions remained unresolved for more than three years as of 2025. Insurance, Housing, and Banking sectors lead in case filings, representing nearly half of the total docket.
Furthermore, while budget allocations for 21 state commissions have risen by 52% between 2021 and 2025, utilization averaged only 85% in the 2024–25 fiscal year. Some states reduced budgets despite rising caseloads; for instance, Jharkhand reported a 47% reduction in its 2024–25 budget while its case filings doubled.